| Contenido del artículo |
- From tcolonial@aol.com Wed Apr 28 16:49:00 2004
Return-Path: <tcolonial@aol.com>
X-Sender: tcolonial@aol.com
X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 97522 invoked from network); 28 Apr 2004 23:48:59 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
by m16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 28 Apr 2004 23:48:59 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.71)
by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Apr 2004 23:48:59 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.148] by n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 28 Apr 2004 23:48:53 -0000
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 23:48:52 -0000
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID: <c6pft4+vm58@eGroups.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 7498
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.218.66.71
From: "TONY CARLOTTO" <tcolonial@aol.com>
X-Originating-IP: 152.163.252.228
Subject: "RR-40" text from Copper Coins of Vermont
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=12773797
X-Yahoo-Profile: tcolonial2
For those who do not have my book here is the text portion of the "RR-
40."
"RYDER-40" TEXT
Here is the most recent newcomer to the Vermont colonial arena. There
has been some recent controversy regarding this particular piece.
Some of the specimens offered for sale at various times in the last
five years have come under scrutiny because of their appearance. It
is believed by many that this piece may be a modern forgery. Only
time will tell for sure. This coin has a logical possibility of being
made at Newburgh along with the two Connecticut relatives listed
above and the imitation reverse Vlack-78B. Trying to put Bressett
reverse-L in place with this obverse V.13 is difficult. Details of
its discovery will be discussed here for the sake of presenting all
the evidence. Most of the knowledgeable people involved in early
coppers believe this piece is not authentic.
During the annual Early American Coppers convention of 1986 in
Washington D.C., some researchers were allowed to view portions of
the collection of the Smithsonian. Two coins that were attributed as
RR-31's turned out to be quite different than originally identified.
Both shared the same Vlack-13 obverse. One was an already known 101-D
or 13-88CT of the Machin's series. The second was the same obverse
V.13, but with a Vermont reverse-L. Somebody could have originally
thought these were George III obverses and just assumed they were RR-
31's. An experienced eye could immediately tell the obverse was not
Bressett-24 of the Ryder-31. The head style and denticles are the
most dramatic difference. Reverse-U that was used with the George III
obverse for Ryder-31 was always weak struck in that combination. The
Smithsonian piece had a reverse with a good amount of detail. Ron
Guth was the lucky "discoverer." I have not been able to find out how
the specimen in the Smithsonian ended up there.
The illustrations above and below show the relatives of the RR-
40. All three coins share the same obverse along with the R-40. This
is one piece of evidence that gives some credence to the possibility
of the RR-40 muling, it was done before, more than once. If the RR-40
were a real product, then a total of four pieces would be related to
the same Vlack-13 obverse.
One bothersome fact about this variety is that reverse-L seems
to be in an early state without a break through the top of E in INDE.
Reverse-L also bulges across the shoulders of the seated figure in
late states when used with Vermont obverse-10 to form Ryder-20. The
announcement of the discovery of this piece in "Penny-Wise" states
that the reverse appears to be in a late state with the possibility
of three rim cuds. It goes on to say that these cuds may be worn down
damage and also what appears to be a break through the final 8 of the
date. In all the late state RR-20's that I have examined, I have not
been able to detect any break in the final 8 of the date. The RR-40
reverse does not show any signs of the thin crack that bisects the
head of the seated figure and ends at the pole as on RR-20. This
crack should have been found on the RR-40. It is not found on RR-19,
as this was the first use of reverse-L.
When obverse V-13 is used with reverse V-78B, V87 CT, and V88
CT, it is usually found with a planchet cutter's lip. Photos of these
three coins are included for comparison. If the 13-L combination were
real, it too would probably have this lip. I am not convinced that
the RR-40 is a real coin.
The piece in the Smithsonian weighs 113.9 grains and is given a
pedigree by Walter Breen in his encyclopedia as being ex-Mendel L.
Peterson. I have not been able to discover any more history of this
piece. Two other specimens have been offered in the last several
years and both are illustrated here and are mentioned and plated
in "The Forgotten Coins of the North American Colonies" by William
Anton and Bruce Kesse. These two coins were from a hoard of 87
originating in England that contained five RR-40 specimens. Each of
these pieces was overstruck on George III counterfeit pieces of
differing weights. The pieces illustrated in this work are the same
pieces as coin number-1 (Anton-Kesse plates IX & X, #158) and coin
number-2 (Anton-Kesse plates I & II, #30). Their weights are 5.60
grams (84 grains) and 6.39 grams (92 grains) respectively. Four of
the five found coins are listed. Coin number-3 was 6.7 grams (100.5
grains) and number-4 a heavy 13.5 grams (202.5 grains).
Vlack Obverse-13 Mates
A little history and description of obverse-13 would help put
the "picture" together here. There are three other uses of V.13 with
three previously used reverse dies.
1. In the Machin's-Atlee series we have 13-78B. 78B was also used
with Vlack obverse-12 which is a little more common than 13-78B.
2. A mule with V.13 is found with Connecticut reverse G.2 of 1787.
This is also called 101-G.2 in Connecticut collecting. Only three
specimens are known at this time. The G.2 reverse was used with a
rare combination with Connecticut obverse-52.
3. Using V.13 with Connecticut reverse-D of 1788 makes another mule.
It is also known as 101-D in a Connecticut collection. Reverse-D was
used twice in the Connecticut series. The first time with obverse-2
and again with obverse 16.1. It is interesting to note that reverse-D
appears to be in late die state in all three uses. Luckily there is
enough die crack progression going on to trace a sequence. It is a
relatively common coin in both Connecticut uses. When used with the
V.13 obverse is it somewhat scarce, approximately R-5.
Reverse-D displays three prominent breaks when seen in all three
of its different lives. A thin crack starts at the lower outer curve
of B in LIB and goes through the bottom of the shield and globe, then
continues on to the left side of the seated figure. In a late state
with obverse 16.1 there is a large cud at the feet. (This is the
break that lets us determine a striking order) A small break is
found at the right side of the upright of I in LIB and the right side
of E in ET shows some signs of breaking. Apparently the coiners felt
this D-reverse could break at any time and just passed it along to
other obverses. I think it lasted much longer than anyone thought it
would. The order of emission is; First-Connecticut 2-D, second 101-
D/13-88CT, third and last, Connecticut 16.1-D. This is proved by die
break progression. It is odd to note the use with a George III
obverse between the use of two Connecticut obverses.
4. This is where V.13 would have been placed with Bressett reverse-L.
One of my main objections to this piece is its "fabric." The overall
appearance, surface, and color of the specimens do not coincide with
any of these coins of the same origin. One piece resides in the
Smithsonian and Anton and Kesse plate two in "The Forgotten Coins". I
am sure that if spectro-analysis were performed on any of these three
pieces, none would match any product of Machin's origin.
Unfortunately this test requires damaging the specimen. The two
Connecticut reverses are known to have been products of Newburgh, and
also used with Connecticut obverses. The journey of reverse-L to
Newburgh/ or late use of it there does not make much sense. The lack
of a late bulge and die cracks make this combination unbelievable. It
is my opinion along with others that this variety is not valid.
|
|---|
| URL de origen |
|
|---|
| Fecha de publicación |
|
|---|
| Volumen |
|
|---|
